Mainstream academia disagrees with you. Many religious texts speak of historical personalities. You don't have to believe in religion to believe in history.

But.....The people who wrote those texts were aware of the existence of these historic personalities because they were all written well after the alleged fact.
What better way to introduce a bit of legitimacy to a text than to name drop known historic figures?

In these pol-correct times of course there are people who don't like it when films show true reality..
It's an undisputed fact that some Indian tribes banished members for various reasons, even Indian websites like this one admit it-

"When a tribal member was banished, it amounted to a death sentence; survival depended on support from the tribe working together. On one’s own, a person was exposed to the elements, wild life and warring, rival tribes."https://indiancountrymedianetwork.co...al-banishment/

... was NOT intentionally leaving the "old and infirm out to die of cold and starvation", the elderly were revered in the cultures of First Nations, as they still are today. Banishment was a disciplinary measure, used for the incorrigible.

The quote you provided, so disingenuously, actually points this out when placed in context:

For hundreds of years Native Americans have fought colonization and banishment from their own lands. Now, in an ironic twist, some Native Americans are being banished from their reservations back to these same stolen lands in an attempt to address problems with violence and crime.

Tribal banishment is not new, but it appears to be gaining renewed attention because of tribes’ use of the practice to deal with contemporary issues.

In early tribal communities banishment was seldom used. A value that is shared by many Native communities includes staying out of others’ business and offering your opinion on a subject only when asked. This value allowed for peace among the tribal members.

According to our tribal elders, there was no drug use or abuse, because drugs and alcohol were introduced to Native people by Europeans. Child abuse was very rare because parenting was shared by many members and children were treated as sacred gifts from the creator. Domestic violence was a problem only on occasion. If a situation wasn’t resolved, a relative or often a trusted elder was sent to speak to the offender and harmony was usually restored. If the situation continued unresolved then, banishment was used.

When a tribal member was banished, it amounted to a death sentence; survival depended on support from the tribe working together. On one’s own, a person was exposed to the elements, wild life and warring, rival tribes.

PS- We know not all indians were heathen savages, for example Tonto and the Lone Ranger were great mates, and in fact Tonto was one of my boyhood heroes, I remember in one episode he was trapped in quicksand and slowly sinking, but he just calmly stayed still and silent instead of panicking, waiting for the LR to arrive and rescue him.
I swore then that if ever I was trapped in quicksand I'd be like him and stay kool..

But.....The people who wrote those texts were aware of the existence of these historic personalities because they were all written well after the alleged fact.
What better way to introduce a bit of legitimacy to a text than to name drop known historic figures?

The "written long after the fact" bit is highly disputable and relies heavily on the "assuming absence of evidence is evidence of absence" fallacy. It is based on the earliest copies that have been found which by itself is not evidence that copies did not exist prior to that point.

The truth is that while we don't know precisely when each book was written, there are historical clues which give us an idea. I have referenced Hebrews, a book that would never have been written after the sack of Jerusalem because it would be pointless then. That alone clues us into Paul's letters being contemporary works and not something scratched out decades or centuries later. The theological issues debated in scripture strongly point to these works being composed while Jerusalem was still the center of Jewish culture and a strong divide existed between jewish and gentile converts - issues that would not need addressing even a few decades later. These hints point to the writings now consolidated in the NT being contemporary and not something put together many years past. Their teachings would be irrelevant then.

As Jesus' movement started in Judea then fanned outward after his death - either by his posthumous decree or as a result of Jewish persecution depending on your beliefs - there would be no need to address a schism of gentile and Jewish converts prior to 33 AD and as the sack of Jerusalem put Jewish culture into diaspora after 70 AD Jewish and gentile Christians would no longer be crowded in and under cultural tension. Therefore the teachings of NT scriptures were most likely composed in between that time period as they were addressed to that audience. Questions like "should you be circumcised before being baptized" and "can you eat "unclean" food" are topics irrelevant to Christianity by 100 AD.

And they do name drop historic figures. Several in fact.

__________________
A new life awaits you in the off world colonies; the chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!